Who are the greatest players ever?

[OleMissCub]

I know we've had threads like this before, but heck, we'll have a new one.

 

Top 5 Offensive players

 

1) Babe Ruth

2) Ted Williams

3) Ty Cobb

4) Willie Mays

5) Hank Aaron/Stan Musial - tie

 

Top 5 Pitchers

 

1) Walter Johnson

2) Christy Matthewson

3) Sandy Koufax

4) Cy Young

5) Warren Spahn

 

hard list to make

[dougdescenzo]

Ole Miss, just curious as to why you're omitting Bonds, is it because of the issues over steroids or because you feel those 6 were better hitters?

 

Top 5 Offensive:

1. Babe Ruth

2. Barry Bonds

3. Ted Williams

4. Mickey Mantle

5. Ty Cobb

 

Pitchers:

1. Pedro Martinez

2. Walter Johnson

3. Christy Matthewson

4. Warren Spahn

5. Roger Clemens

[rjchapma]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

[OleMissCub]

Ole Miss, just curious as to why you're omitting Bonds, is it because of the issues over steroids or because you feel those 6 were better hitters?

 

Barry Bonds would be in my Top 5, except for the fact that he felt the need to take roids and thus gain an unfair advantage, i.e. become a cheater later in his career. Barry Bonds is probably the best all around offensive player in history considering that his career average is 40 homers, 30 sb a year. But I just can't have someone like that on my list.

[USSoccer]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

[rjchapma]

Thats debatable and even if he was the best of the 90's it doesn't mean hes on.e of the best pitchers of all time

[OleMissCub]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Aaron had better offensive seasonal averages than Mays in every offensive category, why aren't you upset about Mays being included.

[USSoccer]

Thats debatable and even if he was the best of the 90's it doesn't mean hes on.e of the best pitchers of all time

 

Because why? Because it was the 90's?

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/martipe02.shtml

 

Look at his comparables thru age 33. It's a who's who of HOF pitchers. No one dominated like Pedro dominated in the 1990's and that was during an extreme offensive era.

Edited February 22, 2006 by USSoccer

[rjchapma]

I meant why was he number one of all time that makes no sense

[USSoccer]

I meant why was he number one of all time that makes no sense

 

I think it's a point you can debate. He pitched in the most offensively dominant era of baseball (1997-2003), and posted these ERAs:

 

1.90

2.89

2.07

1.74

2.39

2.26

2.22

[OleMissCub]

I meant why was he number one of all time that makes no sense

 

he definitely deserves consideration for top 5, it shouldn't shock anyone he's in top 5. His seasonal averages are also better than Koufax. And being shocked because he pitched in the 90's should only HELP the argument that he belongs on that list. With the offensive explosion of baseball in the past 15 years, it is even more amazing he has such great pitching stats.

[USSoccer]

I meant why was he number one of all time that makes no sense

 

he definitely deserves consideration for top 5, it shouldn't shock anyone he's in top 5. His seasonal averages are also better than Koufax. And being shocked because he pitched in the 90's should only HELP the argument that he belongs on that list. With the offensive explosion of baseball in the past 15 years, it is even more amazing he has such great pitching stats.

 

He put up a .472 OPS against in 2000. Unreal.

[Mizzou]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

 

I don't think that's true. I think Maddux was much better in the 90's. Pedro didn't become a starter until 1994, as well.

[dougdescenzo]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Since i put Pedro as 1st on my list I'll defend myself. First, his adjusted ERA+ is #1 all-time by a HUGE margin. He ranks 2nd all-time in K/BB and 3rd all-time in K/9IP, hits allowed/9, W/L %, and WHIP. He has done all this while pitching in an era where at least a few (if not the majority) of the hitters were aided by performance enhancing drugs, and ballparks were being built to increase scoring. Give me some reasons as to why Pedro should not be listed in the top 5 pitchers of all time.

[Tim]

I meant why was he number one of all time that makes no sense

Part of the problem of comparing pitchers across eras is the different offensive environments due to parks, expansion, etc. One way to solve this problem is to compare a pitcher to the league average and then adjust for how good of a park he plays in, etc. This is what ERA+ does. It is a measure of how good a pitcher is when compared to his peers so that you can say pitcher x was 30% better than average over his career and pitcher y was only 20% better. It is probably one of the more fair ways of comparing players from the 20's, 60's and 00's.

 

Now take a look at this list.

 

All the pitchers on the list are pretty tightly bunched except for one. Pedro, on a per inning basis, is very, very easily the best pitcher in baseball history. Nobody is even close. I personally believe that he hasn't been durable enough to be considered the best of all time yet. But it is very easy to make a case for him.

[OleMissCub]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

 

I don't think that's true. I think Maddux was much better in the 90's. Pedro didn't become a starter until 1994, as well.

 

I don't know, for me, after looking at their stats, it's almost too close to call.

[Roast]

1. Babe Ruth

2. Ty Cobb

3-infinity ?

[USSoccer]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

 

I don't think that's true. I think Maddux was much better in the 90's. Pedro didn't become a starter until 1994, as well.

 

Maddux was great, but Pedro was nearly unbeatable.

 

Maddux's best stretch was probably between 1992-98, of which more than half of was not during the same offensive boom as 1997-2003. Pedro's peripherals are a lot better than Maddux's as well.

 

Both were great, but Pedro was simply on another level during his peak, wheras Maddux was "just" great

[UK1679666180]

Jimmy Key higher than Drysdale? Terrible.

 

Favorite Pitchers of all-time...

 

Maddux, Drysdale, Feller, Koufax, Gibson, Moyer, and Clemens.

 

Favorite Hitters...

 

Williams, Dimaggio, Ruth, Greenberg, Gwynn, and Olerud.

 

Not the best of all-time, b/c it's one giant debate.

[Mizzou]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

 

I don't think that's true. I think Maddux was much better in the 90's. Pedro didn't become a starter until 1994, as well.

 

I don't know, for me, after looking at their stats, it's almost too close to call.

Pedro became a starter in 1994, so let's compare the two's ERA+ year-by-year.

 

Year - Maddux - Pedro

1994 - 273 - 123

1995 - 259 - 120

1996 - 162 - 117

1997 - 191 - 221

1998 - 191 - 160

1999 - 122 - 245

 

Personally, I'd give the edge to Maddux. He was by far the better pitcher two of the six years, a good amount better in two of the four years, and Pedro was by far better one year and marginally better the 6th year.

 

Edit: Also, a quick look appears that Greg's K:BB ratio was about 7:1 during those years and Pedro's was around 5:1.

 

Edit again: Looks like Greg had the better WHIP too. Yeah, I'd definitely say that Maddux was the best pitcher of the 90's.

Edited February 22, 2006 by Mizzou

[Tim]

I know we've had threads like this before, but heck, we'll have a new one.

 

Top 5 Offensive players

 

1) Babe Ruth

2) Ted Williams

3) Ty Cobb

4) Willie Mays

5) Hank Aaron/Stan Musial - tie

 

Top 5 Pitchers

 

1) Walter Johnson

2) Christy Matthewson

3) Sandy Koufax

4) Cy Young

5) Warren Spahn

 

hard list to make

Does greatest players include defense, baserunning, etc? I'll assume it does.

 

1) Babe

2) Mays

3) Wagner

4) Bonds

5) Williams

 

 

1) Walter Johnson

2) Lefty Grove

3) Roger Clemens

4) Cy Young

5) Pete Alexander

[USSoccer]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

 

I don't think that's true. I think Maddux was much better in the 90's. Pedro didn't become a starter until 1994, as well.

 

I don't know, for me, after looking at their stats, it's almost too close to call.

Pedro became a starter in 1994, so let's compare the two's ERA+ year-by-year.

 

Year - Maddux - Pedro

1994 - 273 - 123

1995 - 259 - 120

1996 - 162 - 117

1997 - 191 - 221

1998 - 191 - 160

1999 - 122 - 245

 

Personally, I'd give the edge to Maddux. He was by far the better pitcher two of the six years, a good amount better in two of the four years, and Pedro was by far better one year and marginally better the 6th year.

 

Look at their respective peaks and tell me who was better...

 

EDIT:

 

Maddux ERA+ 1992-98

 

166

171

273

259

162

191

191

 

Pedro 1997-2003

 

221

160

245

285

189

196

212

 

4 seasons with a 200 or higher ERA+ in a tougher offensive era, in a better hitters league, in a division with 3 hitters parks.

[Mizzou]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

 

I don't think that's true. I think Maddux was much better in the 90's. Pedro didn't become a starter until 1994, as well.

 

I don't know, for me, after looking at their stats, it's almost too close to call.

Pedro became a starter in 1994, so let's compare the two's ERA+ year-by-year.

 

Year - Maddux - Pedro

1994 - 273 - 123

1995 - 259 - 120

1996 - 162 - 117

1997 - 191 - 221

1998 - 191 - 160

1999 - 122 - 245

 

Personally, I'd give the edge to Maddux. He was by far the better pitcher two of the six years, a good amount better in two of the four years, and Pedro was by far better one year and marginally better the 6th year.

 

Look at their respective peaks and tell me who was better...

 

Well, we were talking about best pitcher of the 90's, so I only used Maddux's numbers beginning with the time Pedro became a starter. But if you want to look at the whole decade, Maddux was real good in 90 and 91 and great in 92 and 93. I'd say Greg would get the award for pitcher of the decade.

 

In response to your edit...

 

I wont argue that Maddux was better through the late 90's and into the 2000's. He was the best pitcher of the 90's though, IMO.

Edited February 22, 2006 by Mizzou

[Rob]

Are we looking at positional scarcity as a factor here?

 

Hitters:

 

1. Babe Ruth

2. Barry Bonds (sad, but true)

3. Ted Williams

4. Honus Wagner

5. Willie Mays

 

Pitchers:

 

1. Walter Johnson

2. Lefty Grove

3. Roger Clemens

4. Cy Young (can't really place anybody with 511 wins further down the list, can we?)

5. Pedro Martinez

 

Pedro will steadily move up or down the chart based on his health, but I think 5 is a good baseline.

[USSoccer]

WHAT?

Why is Hank Aaron and Pedro Martinez in the top 5 of either list.

 

Pedro Martinez was hands down, the best pitcher of the 1990's. It's not even close. Look at his numbers in that decade.

 

I don't think that's true. I think Maddux was much better in the 90's. Pedro didn't become a starter until 1994, as well.

 

I don't know, for me, after looking at their stats, it's almost too close to call.

Pedro became a starter in 1994, so let's compare the two's ERA+ year-by-year.

 

Year - Maddux - Pedro

1994 - 273 - 123

1995 - 259 - 120

1996 - 162 - 117

1997 - 191 - 221

1998 - 191 - 160

1999 - 122 - 245

 

Personally, I'd give the edge to Maddux. He was by far the better pitcher two of the six years, a good amount better in two of the four years, and Pedro was by far better one year and marginally better the 6th year.

 

Look at their respective peaks and tell me who was better...

 

Well, we were talking about best pitcher of the 90's, so I only used Maddux's numbers beginning with the time Pedro became a starter. But if you want to look at the whole decade, Maddux was real good in 90 and 91 and great in 92 and 93. I'd say Greg would get the award for pitcher of the decade.

 

But he pitched in the NL, so he got an extra 3 outs per start from the 9 hole. He also pitched most of those years in Turner Field, Shea Stadium, Pro Player, and the Vet. All of those are pitchers park.

 

Pedro pitched in a division with Yankee Stadium and Fenway, which both have short porches, and Camden Yards, which is a launch pad. Tropicana isn't a pitchers park, either, PLUS he had the DH to deal with.

 

And in response to your edit, overall, Maddux and Pedro are porbably 1 and 1a during the 1990s. I lean towards Pedro because of circumstance, and performance during his peak relative to Maddux's, but both were just awfully, awfully good.